DETERMINATION OF SOCIAL SUSTAINABILITY LEVEL WITH QUANTITATIVE INDICATORS: A RESEARCH ON NON-METALLIC MINERAL COMPANIES LISTED ON BORSA ISTANBUL

Yıl 2018, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 3, 295 - 308, 30.09.2018

Cuneyd Ebrar Levent

Öz

Purpose- The purpose
of this research, is to create a framework of social sustainability expressed
as quantitative indicators and to analyze the social sustainability level of
the companies listed on Borsa Istanbul (BIST) in non-metallic mineral industry
sector.   

Methodology- In this
study, social sustainability is measured by 8 categories and 22 criteria
considering the literature. Social sustainability data were obtained from
publicly available sources in 2017, such as the annual report, the corporate
governance compliance report, and the minutes of the general meeting. The
social sustainability levels of companies are analyzed by frequency analysis
technique. The calculated category and criteria scores were also examined on
the basis of the market values of the companies. 

Findings- As a result
of the research, the level of social sustainability in the non-metallic mineral
industry was determined as 46.97. Within the social sustainability categories,
the highest score was found in the ethics category, and the lowest score was
found in the philanthropy category. The results are also analyzed according to
the market capitalization of companies. According to the results, in all social
sustainability categories, companies with high market value have a higher
social sustainability score than others.

Conclusion- The results show that the social sustainability
level is inadequate for the non-metallic mineral industry. In general, it is
thought that this study contributes to the literature on social sustainability
by providing a new perspective by suggesting measurable, comparable criteria.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Social sustainability, social responsibility, corporate governance, disclosure, market value

Kaynakça

• Ahmadi, H. B., Kusi-Sarpong, S., Rezaei, J. (2017). Assessing the social sustainability of supply chains using Best Worst Method. Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Vol.126 , 99-106.
• Bamgbade, J., Kamaruddeen, A., Nawi, M. (2017). Malaysian construction firms' social sustainability via organizational innovativeness and government support: the mediating role of market culture. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 154 , 114-124.
• BIST. (n.d.). Borsa Istanbul. Retrieved from http://www.borsaistanbul.com/en/home-page
• CMB. (n.d.). Capital Markets Board or Turkey. Retrieved from http://www.cmb.gov.tr/
• D’ Amato, D., Li, N., Rekola, M., Toppinen, A., Lu, F.-F. (2015). Linking forest ecosystem services to corporate sustainability disclosure: a conceptual analysis. Ecosystem Services, Vol. 14 , 170-178.
• Delai, I., Takahashi, S. (2013). Corporate sustainability in emerging markets: insights from the practices reported by the Brazilian retailers. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 47 , 211-221.
• Denizli Cam. (2018). Denizli Cam 2017 annual report. Retrieved from http://www.denizlicam.com.tr/tr/yatirimci-iliskileri/sunumlar-ve-raporlar/yillik-faaliyet-raporlari
• Docekalová, M. P., Kocmanová, A. (2016). Composite indicator for measuring corporate sustainability. Ecological Indicators, Vol. 61 , 612-623.
• Dyllick, T., Hockerts, K. (2002). Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 11 , 130-141.
• Engida, T. G., Rao, X., Berentsen, P. B., Lansink, A. G. (2018). Measuring corporate sustainability performance - the case of European food and beverage companies. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 195 , 734-743.
• Freeman, R. (2010). Strategic management: a stockholder approach. NewYork: Cambridge University Press.
• Friedman, M. (1982). Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
• Glavič, P., Lukman, R. (2007). Review of sustainability terms and their definitions. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 15 , 1875-1885.
• Global Reporting. (2018). About Global Reporting Initiative. Retrieved from https://www.globalreporting.org/information/about-gri/Pages/default.aspx
• Global Reporting. (2013). G4 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines Implementation Manual. Retrieved from https://www.globalreporting.org/resourcelibrary/GRIG4-Part2-Implementation-Manual.pdf
• Hedberg, C.‐J., von Malmborg, F. (2003). The Global Reporting Initiative and corporate sustainability reporting in Swedish companies. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, Vol.10 , 153-164.
• Hutchins, M. J., Sutherland, J. W. (2008). An exploration of measures of social sustainability and their application to supply chain decisions. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 16 , 1688-1698.
• KAP. (n.d.). Kamuyu aydınlatma platformu (Public Disclosure Platform). Retrieved from https://www.kap.org.tr/en/
• Mani, V., Gunasekaran, A., Delgado, C. (2018). Supply chain social sustainability: standard adoption practices in Portuguese manufacturing firms. International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 198 , 149-164.
• Mani, V., Gunasekaran, A., Papadopoulos, T., Hazen, B., Dubey, R. (2016). Supply chain social sustainability for developing nations: evidence from India. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Vol. 111 , 42-52.
• McKenzie, S. (2004). Social sustainability: towards some definitions. Hawke Research Institute working paper series, No. 27 , 1-29.
• Morelli, J. (2011). Environmental sustainability: a defiition for environmental professionals. Journal of Environmental Sustainability, Vol. 1 , 1-9.
• Önce, S., Onay, A., Yeşilçelebi, G. (2015). Corporate sustainability reporting and situation in Turkey. Journal of Economics, Finance and Accounting, Vol. 2, No. 2 , 230-252.
• Popovic, T., Barbosa-Povoa, A., Kraslawski, A., Carvalho, A. (2018). Quantitative indicators for social sustainability assessment of supply chains. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 180 , 748-768.
• Pullman, M. E., Maloni, M. J., Carter, C. R. (2009). Food for thought: social versus environmental sustainability practices and performance outcomes. Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 45, No. 4 , 38-54.
• Salzman, O., Ionescu-Somers, A., Steger, U. (2005). The business case for corporate sustainability: literature review and research options. European Management Journal, Vol. 23, Issue 1 , 27-36.
• Searcy, C., Elkhawas, D. (2012). Corporate sustainability ratings: an investigation into how corporations use the Dow Jones Sustainability Index. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 35 , 79-92.
• Skouloudis, A., Evangelinos, K., Kourmousis, F. (2010). Assessing non-financial reports according to the Global Reporting Initiative guidelines: evidence from Greece. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol.18 , 426-438.
• Statista. (2018). Major countries in worldwide cement production from 2012 to 2017. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/statistics/267364/world-cement-production-by-country/
• Toppinen, A., Li, N., Tuppura, A., Xiong, Y. (2011). Corporate Responsibility and strategic groups in the forest‐based industry: exploratory analysis based on the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) framework. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, Vol. 19, 191-205.
• UN. (2016). Sustainable development goals. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/
• Van Marrewijk, M. (2003). Concepts and definitions of CSR and corporate sustainability: between agency and communion. Journal of Business Ethics, 44 , 95-105.
• WCED. (1987). Our common future: report of the World Commission on Environment and Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.